TYRONE BRYANT v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Appeals, Greene, Filed Feb. 4, 2014,
Illegal Sentence- Enhanced sentence was not inherently illegal for purposes of motion to correct illegal sentence where sufficiency of evidence related to prior convictions was not objected to at trial and the prior convictions, if proven, were legally sufficient to support the enhanced sentence.
More from the opinion, on a motion to correct illegal sentence:
-The distinction between those sentences that are “illegal” in the commonly understood sense, subject to ordinary review and procedural limitations, and those that are “inherently” illegal, subject to correction “at any time” under Rule 4-345(a), has been described as the difference between a substantive error in the sentence itself, and a procedural error in the sentencing proceedings.
– The lack of evidentiary support is a procedural flaw, which does not fall within the category of sentences reviewable under Rule 4-345(a)
J. McDonald joined in a questionably reasoned dissent by J. Watts, who would have ignored the waiver issue